AWE, /3gb and /pae stuff

Hi all,

I'm running under Windows Server 2000 datacenter sp4 with sql server 2000 Sp4

on 16GB Ram.

I enabled the /PAE in the boot.ini file and also enabled the AWE and set the SLQ Server maximum memory to 6144.

Do I need to include the /3GB switch in the boot.ini file?

I'm a little bit confused with the article found on the site. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/274750

Here are the lines.

Use of the /PAE switch in the Boot.ini and the AWE enable option in SQL Server allows SQL Server 2000 to utilize more than 4 GB memory. Without the /PAE switch SQL Server can only utilize up to 3 GB of memory. or-Use of the /3GB switch in the Boot.ini file allows SQL Server 2000 to use up to 3 GB of available memory.

Regards,

Larry

Hi Larry,

As you're running 16GB of RAM, you need to include the /PAE and /3GB switch in boot.ini.

Have a look at http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/pae_os.mspx and http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp

Cheers,

Rob

|||

The /3GB switch allows SQL Server to use an additional 1GB for the database engine purposes -procedure caches, various internal caching needs, etc.

The PAE memory (above 2GB that is not accessed by the /3GB) is used ONLY for data caching.

You most likely want both.

|||

But carefully watch your memory usage when you use 3GB, if misused it might cause system instability because of kernel memory starvation.

Check out the link here with more information about these subjects.

WesleyB

Visit my SQL Server weblog @. http://dis4ea.blogspot.com

AWE SQL Performance Problem

We recently enabled AWE on a SQL Server cluster. Each box has 8CPU and 8GB R
AM. The setting seems to have made the difference in RAM usage, but we are e
xperiencing extremely high CPU utilization and overall the system does not s
eem to be any faster. If an
ything, it seems to have slowed down some. There are a lot of variables, but
I was wondering of anyone has had adverse effects with the AWE setting.From BOL.
<<
To enable AWE, set awe enabled to 1. SQL Server will reserve almost all
available memory, leaving 128 megabytes (MB) or less, unless a value has
been specified for max server memory.
What is your max memory setting? Leaving 128M for the OS probably isn't a
good idea.
BTW... Profiler may be helpful in understanding the CPU usage.
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Phil Appel" <phil@.chileinc.com> wrote in message
news:774F1405-0770-4A4F-B551-9CC330AE9CE4@.microsoft.com...
> We recently enabled AWE on a SQL Server cluster. Each box has 8CPU and 8GB
RAM. The setting seems to have made the difference in RAM usage, but we are
experiencing extremely high CPU utilization and overall the system does not
seem to be any faster. If anything, it seems to have slowed down some. There
are a lot of variables, but I was wondering of anyone has had adverse
effects with the AWE setting.|||We had some CPU spin and server instability issues that were instantaneously
and permenantly solved by turning off the /3GB switch and reducing max
server mem to 1.5GB less than physical. PSS said there was potential kernel
memory starvation with /3GB and max server memory set to near physical. Not
sure if this applies to your scenario.
"Phil Appel" <phil@.chileinc.com> wrote in message
news:774F1405-0770-4A4F-B551-9CC330AE9CE4@.microsoft.com...
> We recently enabled AWE on a SQL Server cluster. Each box has 8CPU and 8GB
RAM. The setting seems to have made the difference in RAM usage, but we are
experiencing extremely high CPU utilization and overall the system does not
seem to be any faster. If anything, it seems to have slowed down some. There
are a lot of variables, but I was wondering of anyone has had adverse
effects with the AWE setting.|||Hi Phil,
I am viewing your post and since we have not heard from you for some time
and I wonder how things go on your side. To disable the AWE to check if the
performance issue is related to the AWE is the method to narrow down
performance problems to AWE. Also, you could refer to the link of the
followings for reference:
How To Gather Information for Effective Troubleshooting of Performance
Issues
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...microsoft.com:
80/support/kb/articles/Q175/6/58.ASP&NoWebContent=1
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;298475
Also, if the case is critical and it should be troubleshot by some advanced
tools which are not supported in the newsgroup. Therefore, we probably will
not be able to resolve the issue through the newsgroups. I'd recommend
opening a Support incident with Microsoft Support Services, so that a
dedicated Support Professional can assist with your advisory case. Please
be advised that contacting phone support will be a charged call.
To obtain the phone numbers for specific technology request please take a
look at the web site listed below.
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...US;PHONENUMBERS
If you are outside the US please see http://support.microsoft.com for
regional support phone numbers.
Thanks.
Hope this helps.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.

awe settings.

SQL2K Ent SP3a Win2k SP3
I've recently enabled awe memory on 2 of our servers.
Everything seems to be going OK, AWE memory counters
are active in performance monitor and the sql serror log
shows awe memory enabled on startup.
My question is, is the above information enough to know that
awe is working correctly? If not, what other things can be looked
at?
TIA.see
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q274750#6
--
BR,
Mark Broadbent mcdba,mcse+i
_________________________
"Stressed" <k@.c.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23oI0KZzVDHA.2164@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> SQL2K Ent SP3a Win2k SP3
> I've recently enabled awe memory on 2 of our servers.
> Everything seems to be going OK, AWE memory counters
> are active in performance monitor and the sql serror log
> shows awe memory enabled on startup.
> My question is, is the above information enough to know that
> awe is working correctly? If not, what other things can be looked
> at?
> TIA.
>
>|||Also, when SQL Server starts you should see a line time in
the event log that says:
"Address Windowing Extensions enabled."
Ron
>--Original Message--
>see
>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;Q274750#6
>--
>BR,
>Mark Broadbent mcdba,mcse+i
>_________________________
>"Stressed" <k@.c.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:%23oI0KZzVDHA.2164@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> SQL2K Ent SP3a Win2k SP3
>> I've recently enabled awe memory on 2 of our servers.
>> Everything seems to be going OK, AWE memory counters
>> are active in performance monitor and the sql serror log
>> shows awe memory enabled on startup.
>> My question is, is the above information enough to know
that
>> awe is working correctly? If not, what other things can
be looked
>> at?
>> TIA.
>>
>>
>
>.
>

AWE Memory: Seeing approx. 1 Gig less than expected

I am runnning a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Standard edition server on Win 200
3,
with 16 GB RAM.
I have AWE enabled, with a Max Server Memory of 14336 (14 GB).
I have /3GB /PAE set in the boot.ini.
When I run SQLServer:Memory Manager, Target Memory (KB) in Perfmon, I only
see 13722592 KB (or 13400.96875 MB, 13.086 GB) being used out of the 14 GB
specified.
Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200610/1If I recall correctly, AWE consumes about 1GB of memory as overhead.
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"cbrichards via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:67a8999d3983c@.uwe...
>I am runnning a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Standard edition server on Win
>2003,
> with 16 GB RAM.
> I have AWE enabled, with a Max Server Memory of 14336 (14 GB).
> I have /3GB /PAE set in the boot.ini.
> When I run SQLServer:Memory Manager, Target Memory (KB) in Perfmon, I only
> see 13722592 KB (or 13400.96875 MB, 13.086 GB) being used out of the 14 GB
> specified.
> Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200610/1
>|||Thanks Arnie. I do not dispute that, but it does make me scratch my head.
On another dedicated SQL Server, identical to the current one I am building,
except this other one has only 8 GB of RAM, when I set the Max Server Memory
to 6144 (6 GB), I see all 6144 in Target Memory. If SQL Server keeps 1 GB to
itself, then I would expect to only see 5 GB being used in Target Memory, bu
t
no, I am seeing all 6 GB on my 8 GB machine. Just makes me wonder...makes me
feel like I am being cheated out of approximately 1 GB on my 16 GB server,
since I have 14 GB specified in Max Server Memory and am only seeing 13 GB i
n
Target Memory.
Arnie Rowland wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
>If I recall correctly, AWE consumes about 1GB of memory as overhead.
>
>[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200610/1|||I really don't recall if that 1GB overhead is in addition to the AWE
allocation, or if it is part of the AWE allocation. (I always thought that
it was outside of the AWE allocation.)
So, back to your situation.
Is it possible that there is some other usage on the box that is grabbing
memory from the OS before AWE can get it's share (thereby leaving only 13GB
for AWE)?
Another instance of SQL Server with /3GB switch?
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"cbrichards via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:67a9b4e454ccc@.uwe...
> Thanks Arnie. I do not dispute that, but it does make me scratch my head.
> On another dedicated SQL Server, identical to the current one I am
> building,
> except this other one has only 8 GB of RAM, when I set the Max Server
> Memory
> to 6144 (6 GB), I see all 6144 in Target Memory. If SQL Server keeps 1 GB
> to
> itself, then I would expect to only see 5 GB being used in Target Memory,
> but
> no, I am seeing all 6 GB on my 8 GB machine. Just makes me wonder...makes
> me
> feel like I am being cheated out of approximately 1 GB on my 16 GB server,
> since I have 14 GB specified in Max Server Memory and am only seeing 13 GB
> in
> Target Memory.
> Arnie Rowland wrote:
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200610/1
>|||I suspect that is the case (some other usage on the box is grabbing memory),
but it is not another instance. I am still investigating.
Arnie Rowland wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
>I really don't recall if that 1GB overhead is in addition to the AWE
>allocation, or if it is part of the AWE allocation. (I always thought that
>it was outside of the AWE allocation.)
>So, back to your situation.
>Is it possible that there is some other usage on the box that is grabbing
>memory from the OS before AWE can get it's share (thereby leaving only 13GB
>for AWE)?
>Another instance of SQL Server with /3GB switch?
>
>[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200610/1

AWE Memory: Seeing approx. 1 Gig less than expected

I am runnning a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Standard edition server on Win 2003,
with 16 GB RAM.
I have AWE enabled, with a Max Server Memory of 14336 (14 GB).
I have /3GB /PAE set in the boot.ini.
When I run SQLServer:Memory Manager, Target Memory (KB) in Perfmon, I only
see 13722592 KB (or 13400.96875 MB, 13.086 GB) being used out of the 14 GB
specified.
Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200610/1
If I recall correctly, AWE consumes about 1GB of memory as overhead.
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"cbrichards via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:67a8999d3983c@.uwe...
>I am runnning a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Standard edition server on Win
>2003,
> with 16 GB RAM.
> I have AWE enabled, with a Max Server Memory of 14336 (14 GB).
> I have /3GB /PAE set in the boot.ini.
> When I run SQLServer:Memory Manager, Target Memory (KB) in Perfmon, I only
> see 13722592 KB (or 13400.96875 MB, 13.086 GB) being used out of the 14 GB
> specified.
> Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200610/1
>
|||Thanks Arnie. I do not dispute that, but it does make me scratch my head.
On another dedicated SQL Server, identical to the current one I am building,
except this other one has only 8 GB of RAM, when I set the Max Server Memory
to 6144 (6 GB), I see all 6144 in Target Memory. If SQL Server keeps 1 GB to
itself, then I would expect to only see 5 GB being used in Target Memory, but
no, I am seeing all 6 GB on my 8 GB machine. Just makes me wonder...makes me
feel like I am being cheated out of approximately 1 GB on my 16 GB server,
since I have 14 GB specified in Max Server Memory and am only seeing 13 GB in
Target Memory.
Arnie Rowland wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
>If I recall correctly, AWE consumes about 1GB of memory as overhead.
>[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200610/1
|||I really don't recall if that 1GB overhead is in addition to the AWE
allocation, or if it is part of the AWE allocation. (I always thought that
it was outside of the AWE allocation.)
So, back to your situation.
Is it possible that there is some other usage on the box that is grabbing
memory from the OS before AWE can get it's share (thereby leaving only 13GB
for AWE)?
Another instance of SQL Server with /3GB switch?
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"cbrichards via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:67a9b4e454ccc@.uwe...
> Thanks Arnie. I do not dispute that, but it does make me scratch my head.
> On another dedicated SQL Server, identical to the current one I am
> building,
> except this other one has only 8 GB of RAM, when I set the Max Server
> Memory
> to 6144 (6 GB), I see all 6144 in Target Memory. If SQL Server keeps 1 GB
> to
> itself, then I would expect to only see 5 GB being used in Target Memory,
> but
> no, I am seeing all 6 GB on my 8 GB machine. Just makes me wonder...makes
> me
> feel like I am being cheated out of approximately 1 GB on my 16 GB server,
> since I have 14 GB specified in Max Server Memory and am only seeing 13 GB
> in
> Target Memory.
> Arnie Rowland wrote:
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200610/1
>
|||I suspect that is the case (some other usage on the box is grabbing memory),
but it is not another instance. I am still investigating.
Arnie Rowland wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
>I really don't recall if that 1GB overhead is in addition to the AWE
>allocation, or if it is part of the AWE allocation. (I always thought that
>it was outside of the AWE allocation.)
>So, back to your situation.
>Is it possible that there is some other usage on the box that is grabbing
>memory from the OS before AWE can get it's share (thereby leaving only 13GB
>for AWE)?
>Another instance of SQL Server with /3GB switch?
>[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200610/1

AWE Memory: Seeing approx. 1 Gig less than expected

I am runnning a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Standard edition server on Win 2003,
with 16 GB RAM.
I have AWE enabled, with a Max Server Memory of 14336 (14 GB).
I have /3GB /PAE set in the boot.ini.
When I run SQLServer:Memory Manager, Target Memory (KB) in Perfmon, I only
see 13722592 KB (or 13400.96875 MB, 13.086 GB) being used out of the 14 GB
specified.
Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200610/1If I recall correctly, AWE consumes about 1GB of memory as overhead.
--
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"cbrichards via SQLMonster.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:67a8999d3983c@.uwe...
>I am runnning a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Standard edition server on Win
>2003,
> with 16 GB RAM.
> I have AWE enabled, with a Max Server Memory of 14336 (14 GB).
> I have /3GB /PAE set in the boot.ini.
> When I run SQLServer:Memory Manager, Target Memory (KB) in Perfmon, I only
> see 13722592 KB (or 13400.96875 MB, 13.086 GB) being used out of the 14 GB
> specified.
> Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
> --
> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200610/1
>|||Thanks Arnie. I do not dispute that, but it does make me scratch my head.
On another dedicated SQL Server, identical to the current one I am building,
except this other one has only 8 GB of RAM, when I set the Max Server Memory
to 6144 (6 GB), I see all 6144 in Target Memory. If SQL Server keeps 1 GB to
itself, then I would expect to only see 5 GB being used in Target Memory, but
no, I am seeing all 6 GB on my 8 GB machine. Just makes me wonder...makes me
feel like I am being cheated out of approximately 1 GB on my 16 GB server,
since I have 14 GB specified in Max Server Memory and am only seeing 13 GB in
Target Memory.
Arnie Rowland wrote:
>If I recall correctly, AWE consumes about 1GB of memory as overhead.
>>I am runnning a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Standard edition server on Win
>>2003,
>[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>> Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200610/1|||I really don't recall if that 1GB overhead is in addition to the AWE
allocation, or if it is part of the AWE allocation. (I always thought that
it was outside of the AWE allocation.)
So, back to your situation.
Is it possible that there is some other usage on the box that is grabbing
memory from the OS before AWE can get it's share (thereby leaving only 13GB
for AWE)?
Another instance of SQL Server with /3GB switch?
--
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"cbrichards via SQLMonster.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:67a9b4e454ccc@.uwe...
> Thanks Arnie. I do not dispute that, but it does make me scratch my head.
> On another dedicated SQL Server, identical to the current one I am
> building,
> except this other one has only 8 GB of RAM, when I set the Max Server
> Memory
> to 6144 (6 GB), I see all 6144 in Target Memory. If SQL Server keeps 1 GB
> to
> itself, then I would expect to only see 5 GB being used in Target Memory,
> but
> no, I am seeing all 6 GB on my 8 GB machine. Just makes me wonder...makes
> me
> feel like I am being cheated out of approximately 1 GB on my 16 GB server,
> since I have 14 GB specified in Max Server Memory and am only seeing 13 GB
> in
> Target Memory.
> Arnie Rowland wrote:
>>If I recall correctly, AWE consumes about 1GB of memory as overhead.
>>I am runnning a dedicated SQL Server 2005 Standard edition server on Win
>>2003,
>>[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>> Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
> --
> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200610/1
>|||I suspect that is the case (some other usage on the box is grabbing memory),
but it is not another instance. I am still investigating.
Arnie Rowland wrote:
>I really don't recall if that 1GB overhead is in addition to the AWE
>allocation, or if it is part of the AWE allocation. (I always thought that
>it was outside of the AWE allocation.)
>So, back to your situation.
>Is it possible that there is some other usage on the box that is grabbing
>memory from the OS before AWE can get it's share (thereby leaving only 13GB
>for AWE)?
>Another instance of SQL Server with /3GB switch?
>> Thanks Arnie. I do not dispute that, but it does make me scratch my head.
>[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>> Is this normal, or am I being robbed of a Gig of memory somewhere?
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200610/1

AWE memory on SQL 2005 Standard

Is AWE enabled on SQL 2005 Standard? We currently have it setup using "locked pages in memory" for a domain account and haven't noticed any performance problems.

This article however states that only the SQL2005 Enterprise Edn supports "locked pages in memory". Can anyone confirm this?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918483

If I'm mistaken, how should the memory options be set for a server with 8gb ram running on SQL 2005 Standard which runs on Win2003 Enterprise? Should the min and max memory be set or left alone as default?

SQL 2005 does support AWE. However it does not support "locked pages in memory".

SQL 2005 should be set with AWE and the OS should have /3GB and /PAE in the boot.ini. This will allow Standard Edition to use all 8 Gigs of memory. Set the max memory to between 7 and 7.5 Gigs of memory.

|||

Thanks. Our current configuration has the switches /3GB and /PAE, but it wasn't clear on the "locked pages in memory". Do you know the benefit of having this feature? Also, what would you recommend our minimum memory to be set to?

AWE Memory fix (899761) problems

Hi all,
we have some problem installing the path KB899761 (Fix: Not All Memory
is Available When AWE is Enabled on a Computer Running 32-bit Version
of SQL Server 2000 SP4)
Our scenario is:
1 - we added a third node on an existing cluster
2 - The main differences are that the new node have 64 GB of RAM (the
existing ones have only 8 GB) and the "machine" is 64 bit
3 - On this new server we installed windows 2003 (32 bit) with sql
server 2000 SP4 (with "add node" procedure)
4 - To use all the 64 GB of memory we enabled the AWE feature but
we've seen that we could only use 32 GB. For this reason we've found
out that we need the 899761 patch.
Now we tried to install the patch but it seems that it just work on the
old (32 bit) nodes. If we try to install the patch on the new node (we
have the correct instance up and running) we get the following error:
"this machine does not have a product that matches this installation
package"
On the log file we see:
"No products were found which can be serviced by this package"
At the moment we don't know what to try to solve the problem. (maybe
problem with hardware at 64 bit (core 2 duo) and OS at 32 bit ?)
If someone as any idea it would be fantastic ...
Thanks very much in advance.
Kind regards,
Daniel HubeliHi Daniel
You don't say what edition you are using, but I guess from your combination
it can't be Datacenter!
Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition supports 32 GB of physical RAM and
Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition supports 64 GB of physical RAM
You will not be taking full advantage of your new hardware by running
mismatched products and you would also need to consider if failing over to
the lower spec machines is actually a viable alternative.
John
"daniel.hubeli@.aduno.ch" wrote:

> Hi all,
> we have some problem installing the path KB899761 (Fix: Not All Memory
> is Available When AWE is Enabled on a Computer Running 32-bit Version
> of SQL Server 2000 SP4)
> Our scenario is:
> 1 - we added a third node on an existing cluster
> 2 - The main differences are that the new node have 64 GB of RAM (the
> existing ones have only 8 GB) and the "machine" is 64 bit
> 3 - On this new server we installed windows 2003 (32 bit) with sql
> server 2000 SP4 (with "add node" procedure)
> 4 - To use all the 64 GB of memory we enabled the AWE feature but
> we've seen that we could only use 32 GB. For this reason we've found
> out that we need the 899761 patch.
> Now we tried to install the patch but it seems that it just work on the
> old (32 bit) nodes. If we try to install the patch on the new node (we
> have the correct instance up and running) we get the following error:
> "this machine does not have a product that matches this installation
> package"
> On the log file we see:
> "No products were found which can be serviced by this package"
> At the moment we don't know what to try to solve the problem. (maybe
> problem with hardware at 64 bit (core 2 duo) and OS at 32 bit ?)
> If someone as any idea it would be fantastic ...
> Thanks very much in advance.
> Kind regards,
> Daniel Hubeli
>

AWE Memory fix (899761) problems

Hi all,
we have some problem installing the path KB899761 (Fix: Not All Memory
is Available When AWE is Enabled on a Computer Running 32-bit Version
of SQL Server 2000 SP4)
Our scenario is:
1 - we added a third node on an existing cluster
2 - The main differences are that the new node have 64 GB of RAM (the
existing ones have only 8 GB) and the "machine" is 64 bit
3 - On this new server we installed windows 2003 (32 bit) with sql
server 2000 SP4 (with "add node" procedure)
4 - To use all the 64 GB of memory we enabled the AWE feature but
we've seen that we could only use 32 GB. For this reason we've found
out that we need the 899761 patch.
Now we tried to install the patch but it seems that it just work on the
old (32 bit) nodes. If we try to install the patch on the new node (we
have the correct instance up and running) we get the following error:
"this machine does not have a product that matches this installation
package"
On the log file we see:
"No products were found which can be serviced by this package"
At the moment we don't know what to try to solve the problem. (maybe
problem with hardware at 64 bit (core 2 duo) and OS at 32 bit ?)
If someone as any idea it would be fantastic ...
Thanks very much in advance.
Kind regards,
Daniel Hubeli
Hi Daniel
You don't say what edition you are using, but I guess from your combination
it can't be Datacenter!
Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition supports 32 GB of physical RAM and
Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition supports 64 GB of physical RAM
You will not be taking full advantage of your new hardware by running
mismatched products and you would also need to consider if failing over to
the lower spec machines is actually a viable alternative.
John
"daniel.hubeli@.aduno.ch" wrote:

> Hi all,
> we have some problem installing the path KB899761 (Fix: Not All Memory
> is Available When AWE is Enabled on a Computer Running 32-bit Version
> of SQL Server 2000 SP4)
> Our scenario is:
> 1 - we added a third node on an existing cluster
> 2 - The main differences are that the new node have 64 GB of RAM (the
> existing ones have only 8 GB) and the "machine" is 64 bit
> 3 - On this new server we installed windows 2003 (32 bit) with sql
> server 2000 SP4 (with "add node" procedure)
> 4 - To use all the 64 GB of memory we enabled the AWE feature but
> we've seen that we could only use 32 GB. For this reason we've found
> out that we need the 899761 patch.
> Now we tried to install the patch but it seems that it just work on the
> old (32 bit) nodes. If we try to install the patch on the new node (we
> have the correct instance up and running) we get the following error:
> "this machine does not have a product that matches this installation
> package"
> On the log file we see:
> "No products were found which can be serviced by this package"
> At the moment we don't know what to try to solve the problem. (maybe
> problem with hardware at 64 bit (core 2 duo) and OS at 32 bit ?)
> If someone as any idea it would be fantastic ...
> Thanks very much in advance.
> Kind regards,
> Daniel Hubeli
>

AWE Memory fix (899761) problems

Hi all,
we have some problem installing the path KB899761 (Fix: Not All Memory
is Available When AWE is Enabled on a Computer Running 32-bit Version
of SQL Server 2000 SP4)
Our scenario is:
1 - we added a third node on an existing cluster
2 - The main differences are that the new node have 64 GB of RAM (the
existing ones have only 8 GB) and the "machine" is 64 bit
3 - On this new server we installed windows 2003 (32 bit) with sql
server 2000 SP4 (with "add node" procedure)
4 - To use all the 64 GB of memory we enabled the AWE feature but
we've seen that we could only use 32 GB. For this reason we've found
out that we need the 899761 patch.
Now we tried to install the patch but it seems that it just work on the
old (32 bit) nodes. If we try to install the patch on the new node (we
have the correct instance up and running) we get the following error:
"this machine does not have a product that matches this installation
package"
On the log file we see:
"No products were found which can be serviced by this package"
At the moment we don't know what to try to solve the problem. (maybe
problem with hardware at 64 bit (core 2 duo) and OS at 32 bit ?)
If someone as any idea it would be fantastic ...
Thanks very much in advance.
Kind regards,
Daniel HubeliHi Daniel
You don't say what edition you are using, but I guess from your combination
it can't be Datacenter!
Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition supports 32 GB of physical RAM and
Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition supports 64 GB of physical RAM
You will not be taking full advantage of your new hardware by running
mismatched products and you would also need to consider if failing over to
the lower spec machines is actually a viable alternative.
John
"daniel.hubeli@.aduno.ch" wrote:
> Hi all,
> we have some problem installing the path KB899761 (Fix: Not All Memory
> is Available When AWE is Enabled on a Computer Running 32-bit Version
> of SQL Server 2000 SP4)
> Our scenario is:
> 1 - we added a third node on an existing cluster
> 2 - The main differences are that the new node have 64 GB of RAM (the
> existing ones have only 8 GB) and the "machine" is 64 bit
> 3 - On this new server we installed windows 2003 (32 bit) with sql
> server 2000 SP4 (with "add node" procedure)
> 4 - To use all the 64 GB of memory we enabled the AWE feature but
> we've seen that we could only use 32 GB. For this reason we've found
> out that we need the 899761 patch.
> Now we tried to install the patch but it seems that it just work on the
> old (32 bit) nodes. If we try to install the patch on the new node (we
> have the correct instance up and running) we get the following error:
> "this machine does not have a product that matches this installation
> package"
> On the log file we see:
> "No products were found which can be serviced by this package"
> At the moment we don't know what to try to solve the problem. (maybe
> problem with hardware at 64 bit (core 2 duo) and OS at 32 bit ?)
> If someone as any idea it would be fantastic ...
> Thanks very much in advance.
> Kind regards,
> Daniel Hubeli
>

AWE Memory

I am finding conflicting opinions on how to monitor memory bottlenecks on AWE
enabled systems. Can anyone provide any meaningfull info? I am aware of all
the related performance counters. Howeve,r I do not know which one are still
usefull once AWE is enabled. Also what are the accepable values for the AWE
counters?
Oscar ElleseffThe PageLifeExpentancy and CacheHitRatio counters are still very valid and
most useful for determining if you have memory pressure.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Oscar" <Oscar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5B77575A-EE3C-41E5-8971-7436ADD59C37@.microsoft.com...
>I am finding conflicting opinions on how to monitor memory bottlenecks on
>AWE
> enabled systems. Can anyone provide any meaningfull info? I am aware of
> all
> the related performance counters. Howeve,r I do not know which one are
> still
> usefull once AWE is enabled. Also what are the accepable values for the
> AWE
> counters?
> Oscar Elleseff|||Thank You Andrew,
What about AWE specific counters? How can they be used to evaluate memory
pressure? For example, does 'AWE lookup/maps sec' have any applications in
this case and if it does what are the values we should be looking for?
Oscar Elleseff
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> The PageLifeExpentancy and CacheHitRatio counters are still very valid and
> most useful for determining if you have memory pressure.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Oscar" <Oscar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5B77575A-EE3C-41E5-8971-7436ADD59C37@.microsoft.com...
> >I am finding conflicting opinions on how to monitor memory bottlenecks on
> >AWE
> > enabled systems. Can anyone provide any meaningfull info? I am aware of
> > all
> > the related performance counters. Howeve,r I do not know which one are
> > still
> > usefull once AWE is enabled. Also what are the accepable values for the
> > AWE
> > counters?
> >
> > Oscar Elleseff
>
>|||If there is memory pressure in AWE or physical memory it will show up in the
counters mentioned. The AWE specific counters may be useful for some very
specific troubleshooting but you will see memory pressure first in the PLF &
CacheHit Ratio counters.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Oscar" <Oscar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C1B1A04D-ED6E-4306-8510-5D51D4E959A2@.microsoft.com...
> Thank You Andrew,
> What about AWE specific counters? How can they be used to evaluate memory
> pressure? For example, does 'AWE lookup/maps sec' have any applications
> in
> this case and if it does what are the values we should be looking for?
> Oscar Elleseff
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>> The PageLifeExpentancy and CacheHitRatio counters are still very valid
>> and
>> most useful for determining if you have memory pressure.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>>
>> "Oscar" <Oscar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:5B77575A-EE3C-41E5-8971-7436ADD59C37@.microsoft.com...
>> >I am finding conflicting opinions on how to monitor memory bottlenecks
>> >on
>> >AWE
>> > enabled systems. Can anyone provide any meaningfull info? I am aware
>> > of
>> > all
>> > the related performance counters. Howeve,r I do not know which one are
>> > still
>> > usefull once AWE is enabled. Also what are the accepable values for
>> > the
>> > AWE
>> > counters?
>> >
>> > Oscar Elleseff
>>

AWE MEM

Hi ,
I have win2k server with 4 GB Ram
enabled /3gb switch to use all RAM
SQL SERVER 2K enterprise edition
enabled awe switch .
When started sql server it occupied only 2GB not all
is it correct .'
Thanks
ARRHi,
I don't think you need to enable AWE, /3GB swith is enough for 4 GB Memory..
And from where you are monitoring SQL mem usage. Task Manager shows
incorrect values sometimes, use Performance Monitor- SQL Server:Memory
Manager:Total Server Memory instead..
"Aju" wrote:
> Hi ,
> I have win2k server with 4 GB Ram
> enabled /3gb switch to use all RAM
> SQL SERVER 2K enterprise edition
> enabled awe switch .
> When started sql server it occupied only 2GB not all
> is it correct .'
> Thanks
> ARR
>
>|||The /3GB switch will allow Sql server to use up to 3GB of the 4 but only if
you are running Win2K Adv Server or higher. If it is std server you can
only use 2GB for Sql Server. You should turn off AWE and leave the rest for
the OS and any other apps running.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Aju" <ajuonline@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e1SBmT8HFHA.2976@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi ,
> I have win2k server with 4 GB Ram
> enabled /3gb switch to use all RAM
> SQL SERVER 2K enterprise edition
> enabled awe switch .
> When started sql server it occupied only 2GB not all
> is it correct .'
> Thanks
> ARR
>|||If you are running only Win2K Standard Edition, /3GB option is not
supported. However, with 4 GB ram and SS2K EE, you should still be able to
use AWE, either 2 GB lower, up to 2 GB AWE, or 3 GB lower and up to 1 GB AWE
depending on the /3GB switch setting.
Also check out the SQL Server:Memory Manager, Target Server Memory. If this
value is not larger than Total Server Memory, the BPool does not know to
grow.
Finally, you have to RECONFIGURE and RESTART before the enable AWE takes
effect.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Umut Nazlica" <UmutNazlica@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F53E1E3D-F422-4187-9FCC-8067C6432E0D@.microsoft.com...
Hi,
I don't think you need to enable AWE, /3GB swith is enough for 4 GB Memory..
And from where you are monitoring SQL mem usage. Task Manager shows
incorrect values sometimes, use Performance Monitor- SQL Server:Memory
Manager:Total Server Memory instead..
"Aju" wrote:
> Hi ,
> I have win2k server with 4 GB Ram
> enabled /3gb switch to use all RAM
> SQL SERVER 2K enterprise edition
> enabled awe switch .
> When started sql server it occupied only 2GB not all
> is it correct .'
> Thanks
> ARR
>
>

AWE enabled on 64 bit system ?

Do we need to enable AWE on a 64 bit system ?
Do we need to add the /PAE switch ?
Can someone send me the link that specifically talks about these settings on
a 64 bit server , if one exists ? ThanksNo
On true 64 bit Intel Itanium Processor based Systems, there is no need for
AWE /3GB or PAE switches.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Hassan" <hassanboy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u7c7lKiuFHA.2948@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Do we need to enable AWE on a 64 bit system ?
> Do we need to add the /PAE switch ?
> Can someone send me the link that specifically talks about these settings
> on a 64 bit server , if one exists ? Thanks
>|||Although, interestingly enough, enabling 'lock pages in memory' can be
beneficial: http://blogs.msdn.com/slavao/archiv.../31/458545.aspx
Thanks,
--
Ryan Stonecipher
Microsoft Sql Server Storage Engine, DBCC
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:ukm9LtiuFHA.2568@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> No
> On true 64 bit Intel Itanium Processor based Systems, there is no need for
> AWE /3GB or PAE switches.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Hassan" <hassanboy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u7c7lKiuFHA.2948@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>

AWE enabled on 64 bit system ?

Do we need to enable AWE on a 64 bit system ?
Do we need to add the /PAE switch ?
Can someone send me the link that specifically talks about these settings on
a 64 bit server , if one exists ? Thanks
No
On true 64 bit Intel Itanium Processor based Systems, there is no need for
AWE /3GB or PAE switches.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Hassan" <hassanboy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u7c7lKiuFHA.2948@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Do we need to enable AWE on a 64 bit system ?
> Do we need to add the /PAE switch ?
> Can someone send me the link that specifically talks about these settings
> on a 64 bit server , if one exists ? Thanks
>
|||Although, interestingly enough, enabling 'lock pages in memory' can be
beneficial: http://blogs.msdn.com/slavao/archive...31/458545.aspx
Thanks,
Ryan Stonecipher
Microsoft Sql Server Storage Engine, DBCC
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:ukm9LtiuFHA.2568@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> No
> On true 64 bit Intel Itanium Processor based Systems, there is no need for
> AWE /3GB or PAE switches.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Hassan" <hassanboy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u7c7lKiuFHA.2948@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>

AWE enabled on 64 bit system ?

Do we need to enable AWE on a 64 bit system ?
Do we need to add the /PAE switch ?
Can someone send me the link that specifically talks about these settings on
a 64 bit server , if one exists ? ThanksNo
On true 64 bit Intel Itanium Processor based Systems, there is no need for
AWE /3GB or PAE switches.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Hassan" <hassanboy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u7c7lKiuFHA.2948@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Do we need to enable AWE on a 64 bit system ?
> Do we need to add the /PAE switch ?
> Can someone send me the link that specifically talks about these settings
> on a 64 bit server , if one exists ? Thanks
>|||Although, interestingly enough, enabling 'lock pages in memory' can be
beneficial: http://blogs.msdn.com/slavao/archive/2005/08/31/458545.aspx
Thanks,
--
Ryan Stonecipher
Microsoft Sql Server Storage Engine, DBCC
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:ukm9LtiuFHA.2568@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> No
> On true 64 bit Intel Itanium Processor based Systems, there is no need for
> AWE /3GB or PAE switches.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Hassan" <hassanboy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u7c7lKiuFHA.2948@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Do we need to enable AWE on a 64 bit system ?
>> Do we need to add the /PAE switch ?
>> Can someone send me the link that specifically talks about these settings
>> on a 64 bit server , if one exists ? Thanks
>

AWE Enabled for 4gb but sqlsevr.exe only uses 74,172k

Ok, I think Im going nuts.
My SQL 2000 Enterprise is setup for AWE supprt. I turned this on and
have checked and re-checked that it is enabled. My server is using 3.57
gb out of 4gb of memory. But I use to remember that I could open the
task manager, and see the process sqlsevr.exe using 3.57 gb, but this
is not the case. I only see sqlsevr.exe using 74,172k but on the
performance tab, the memory usage is at 3.57gb out of 4gb. If I stop
SQL Server, then yes, memory drops from 3.57 to about 400 meg. If I
restart SQL, it goes back up to 3.57gb. I assume SQL is using the full
amount of memory I have available.
My question is for those of you that are running 4gb of memory on your
SQL server, if you go to task manager and look at the mem usage (you
may need to add this column in), does it show the image name
sqlsevr.exe using 3.x gig of memory or do you also see 74,xxx K ?
Anything below 2gb I would assume you do not have AWE enabled, or you
have max memory usage set low.
Just to make sure, I put in the /3gb statement in the boot.ini file,
and made sure that my security policy was to to allow Administrator to
use locked memory.
Maybe I going nuts, but I really thought task manager would show the
full amount of memory for the sqlsevr.exe process, like 3.5x something,
and not 70,xxx K.
Thank you for your help.
Steve.
ps. Running SQL SP4 with the patch for AWE.
You confirmed I am going nuts.
Thank you so much Tibor !!!
Steve.
Tibor Karaszi wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Task manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perfmon instead.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> <steve@.mallsoft.com> wrote in message news:1165304358.654288.142960@.79g2000cws.googlegro ups.com...

AWE Enabled for 4gb but sqlsevr.exe only uses 74,172k

Ok, I think Im going nuts.
My SQL 2000 Enterprise is setup for AWE supprt. I turned this on and
have checked and re-checked that it is enabled. My server is using 3.57
gb out of 4gb of memory. But I use to remember that I could open the
task manager, and see the process sqlsevr.exe using 3.57 gb, but this
is not the case. I only see sqlsevr.exe using 74,172k but on the
performance tab, the memory usage is at 3.57gb out of 4gb. If I stop
SQL Server, then yes, memory drops from 3.57 to about 400 meg. If I
restart SQL, it goes back up to 3.57gb. I assume SQL is using the full
amount of memory I have available.
My question is for those of you that are running 4gb of memory on your
SQL server, if you go to task manager and look at the mem usage (you
may need to add this column in), does it show the image name
sqlsevr.exe using 3.x gig of memory or do you also see 74,xxx K '
Anything below 2gb I would assume you do not have AWE enabled, or you
have max memory usage set low.
Just to make sure, I put in the /3gb statement in the boot.ini file,
and made sure that my security policy was to to allow Administrator to
use locked memory.
Maybe I going nuts, but I really thought task manager would show the
full amount of memory for the sqlsevr.exe process, like 3.5x something,
and not 70,xxx K.
Thank you for your help.
Steve.
ps. Running SQL SP4 with the patch for AWE.Task manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perfmon instead.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<steve@.mallsoft.com> wrote in message news:1165304358.654288.142960@.79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> Ok, I think Im going nuts.
> My SQL 2000 Enterprise is setup for AWE supprt. I turned this on and
> have checked and re-checked that it is enabled. My server is using 3.57
> gb out of 4gb of memory. But I use to remember that I could open the
> task manager, and see the process sqlsevr.exe using 3.57 gb, but this
> is not the case. I only see sqlsevr.exe using 74,172k but on the
> performance tab, the memory usage is at 3.57gb out of 4gb. If I stop
> SQL Server, then yes, memory drops from 3.57 to about 400 meg. If I
> restart SQL, it goes back up to 3.57gb. I assume SQL is using the full
> amount of memory I have available.
> My question is for those of you that are running 4gb of memory on your
> SQL server, if you go to task manager and look at the mem usage (you
> may need to add this column in), does it show the image name
> sqlsevr.exe using 3.x gig of memory or do you also see 74,xxx K '
> Anything below 2gb I would assume you do not have AWE enabled, or you
> have max memory usage set low.
> Just to make sure, I put in the /3gb statement in the boot.ini file,
> and made sure that my security policy was to to allow Administrator to
> use locked memory.
> Maybe I going nuts, but I really thought task manager would show the
> full amount of memory for the sqlsevr.exe process, like 3.5x something,
> and not 70,xxx K.
> Thank you for your help.
> Steve.
> ps. Running SQL SP4 with the patch for AWE.
>|||You confirmed I am going nuts.
Thank you so much Tibor !!!
Steve.
Tibor Karaszi wrote:
> Task manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perfmon instead.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> <steve@.mallsoft.com> wrote in message news:1165304358.654288.142960@.79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> > Ok, I think Im going nuts.
> > My SQL 2000 Enterprise is setup for AWE supprt. I turned this on and
> > have checked and re-checked that it is enabled. My server is using 3.57
> > gb out of 4gb of memory. But I use to remember that I could open the
> > task manager, and see the process sqlsevr.exe using 3.57 gb, but this
> > is not the case. I only see sqlsevr.exe using 74,172k but on the
> > performance tab, the memory usage is at 3.57gb out of 4gb. If I stop
> > SQL Server, then yes, memory drops from 3.57 to about 400 meg. If I
> > restart SQL, it goes back up to 3.57gb. I assume SQL is using the full
> > amount of memory I have available.
> >
> > My question is for those of you that are running 4gb of memory on your
> > SQL server, if you go to task manager and look at the mem usage (you
> > may need to add this column in), does it show the image name
> > sqlsevr.exe using 3.x gig of memory or do you also see 74,xxx K '
> > Anything below 2gb I would assume you do not have AWE enabled, or you
> > have max memory usage set low.
> >
> > Just to make sure, I put in the /3gb statement in the boot.ini file,
> > and made sure that my security policy was to to allow Administrator to
> > use locked memory.
> >
> > Maybe I going nuts, but I really thought task manager would show the
> > full amount of memory for the sqlsevr.exe process, like 3.5x something,
> > and not 70,xxx K.
> >
> > Thank you for your help.
> > Steve.
> >
> > ps. Running SQL SP4 with the patch for AWE.
> >|||> You confirmed I am going nuts.
Hopefully I confirmed that you are *not* going nuts... :-)
> Thank you so much Tibor !!!
Glad I could help.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<steve@.mallsoft.com> wrote in message news:1165305317.570898.202860@.l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
> You confirmed I am going nuts.
> Thank you so much Tibor !!!
> Steve.
>
> Tibor Karaszi wrote:
>> Task manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perfmon instead.
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>> <steve@.mallsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:1165304358.654288.142960@.79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>> > Ok, I think Im going nuts.
>> > My SQL 2000 Enterprise is setup for AWE supprt. I turned this on and
>> > have checked and re-checked that it is enabled. My server is using 3.57
>> > gb out of 4gb of memory. But I use to remember that I could open the
>> > task manager, and see the process sqlsevr.exe using 3.57 gb, but this
>> > is not the case. I only see sqlsevr.exe using 74,172k but on the
>> > performance tab, the memory usage is at 3.57gb out of 4gb. If I stop
>> > SQL Server, then yes, memory drops from 3.57 to about 400 meg. If I
>> > restart SQL, it goes back up to 3.57gb. I assume SQL is using the full
>> > amount of memory I have available.
>> >
>> > My question is for those of you that are running 4gb of memory on your
>> > SQL server, if you go to task manager and look at the mem usage (you
>> > may need to add this column in), does it show the image name
>> > sqlsevr.exe using 3.x gig of memory or do you also see 74,xxx K '
>> > Anything below 2gb I would assume you do not have AWE enabled, or you
>> > have max memory usage set low.
>> >
>> > Just to make sure, I put in the /3gb statement in the boot.ini file,
>> > and made sure that my security policy was to to allow Administrator to
>> > use locked memory.
>> >
>> > Maybe I going nuts, but I really thought task manager would show the
>> > full amount of memory for the sqlsevr.exe process, like 3.5x something,
>> > and not 70,xxx K.
>> >
>> > Thank you for your help.
>> > Steve.
>> >
>> > ps. Running SQL SP4 with the patch for AWE.
>> >
>

AWE Enabled for 4gb but sqlsevr.exe only uses 74,172k

Ok, I think Im going nuts.
My SQL 2000 Enterprise is setup for AWE supprt. I turned this on and
have checked and re-checked that it is enabled. My server is using 3.57
gb out of 4gb of memory. But I use to remember that I could open the
task manager, and see the process sqlsevr.exe using 3.57 gb, but this
is not the case. I only see sqlsevr.exe using 74,172k but on the
performance tab, the memory usage is at 3.57gb out of 4gb. If I stop
SQL Server, then yes, memory drops from 3.57 to about 400 meg. If I
restart SQL, it goes back up to 3.57gb. I assume SQL is using the full
amount of memory I have available.
My question is for those of you that are running 4gb of memory on your
SQL server, if you go to task manager and look at the mem usage (you
may need to add this column in), does it show the image name
sqlsevr.exe using 3.x gig of memory or do you also see 74,xxx K '
Anything below 2gb I would assume you do not have AWE enabled, or you
have max memory usage set low.
Just to make sure, I put in the /3gb statement in the boot.ini file,
and made sure that my security policy was to to allow Administrator to
use locked memory.
Maybe I going nuts, but I really thought task manager would show the
full amount of memory for the sqlsevr.exe process, like 3.5x something,
and not 70,xxx K.
Thank you for your help.
Steve.
ps. Running SQL SP4 with the patch for AWE.Task manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perfmon instead.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<steve@.mallsoft.com> wrote in message news:1165304358.654288.142960@.79g2000cws.googlegroups.
com...
> Ok, I think Im going nuts.
> My SQL 2000 Enterprise is setup for AWE supprt. I turned this on and
> have checked and re-checked that it is enabled. My server is using 3.57
> gb out of 4gb of memory. But I use to remember that I could open the
> task manager, and see the process sqlsevr.exe using 3.57 gb, but this
> is not the case. I only see sqlsevr.exe using 74,172k but on the
> performance tab, the memory usage is at 3.57gb out of 4gb. If I stop
> SQL Server, then yes, memory drops from 3.57 to about 400 meg. If I
> restart SQL, it goes back up to 3.57gb. I assume SQL is using the full
> amount of memory I have available.
> My question is for those of you that are running 4gb of memory on your
> SQL server, if you go to task manager and look at the mem usage (you
> may need to add this column in), does it show the image name
> sqlsevr.exe using 3.x gig of memory or do you also see 74,xxx K '
> Anything below 2gb I would assume you do not have AWE enabled, or you
> have max memory usage set low.
> Just to make sure, I put in the /3gb statement in the boot.ini file,
> and made sure that my security policy was to to allow Administrator to
> use locked memory.
> Maybe I going nuts, but I really thought task manager would show the
> full amount of memory for the sqlsevr.exe process, like 3.5x something,
> and not 70,xxx K.
> Thank you for your help.
> Steve.
> ps. Running SQL SP4 with the patch for AWE.
>|||You confirmed I am going nuts.
Thank you so much Tibor !!!
Steve.
Tibor Karaszi wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Task manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perfmon instead.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> <steve@.mallsoft.com> wrote in message news:1165304358.654288.142960@.79g200
0cws.googlegroups.com...|||> You confirmed I am going nuts.
Hopefully I confirmed that you are *not* going nuts... :-)

> Thank you so much Tibor !!!
Glad I could help.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<steve@.mallsoft.com> wrote in message news:1165305317.570898.202860@.l12g2000cwl.googlegroups
.com...
> You confirmed I am going nuts.
> Thank you so much Tibor !!!
> Steve.
>
> Tibor Karaszi wrote:
>

awe enabled but still has dynamic memory set

The main reason for these questions is each time I view the propery page for this instance I get and error generated in the event log => 1 Configuration option \'show advanced options\' changed from 1 to 1 <= and even though it is a warning it wasn't there before the awe memory was changed.

The dedicated s2k machine has 8GB of memory. AWE has been enabled, and max server memory set to 5120 (this is a clustered instance and the second machine only has 6 Gb. More is on order). When viewing properties for the instance it shows memory as being dynamic with max server memory = 5120.

Should the memory be set to something other than dynamically managed?

I confirmed the settings via sp_configure and AWE is enabled and memory is 5120... And perf mon shows target memory as around 5120 so it looks like things are set correctly. But the dynamically configure sql memory is still selected.

So is that an issue?

Thanks for any input.

MikeMike,

Set the memory to fixed when you use AWE. This way SQL won't have extend the memory whenever it needs it. It will save you some overhead.|||I was plan on making the change but was looking for some doco from Bill 1st.

Thanks for the response!!

Mike

AWE Enabled + Security Settings set but still no memory increase?

Hi,
If anyone has come across a similar issue, any help would
be appreciated . We have a WIN2k3 Server (not advanced)
running SQL 2k Enterprise. We have installed an
additional 2gb worth of memory ramping it up to 4gb. We
have set up AWE enabled settings on SQL 2k and adjusted
the local security settings. Problem is that we never
get above 2gb on our memory usage? Can someone explain
why this is happening and maybe highlight something that
I have missed? The reason for installing the additional
memory was to reduce dts loads and sql qry times that hit
2gb memory capacity on a daily basis?!?! Why doesnt sql
use the additional 2gb?!!
Thanks in advance
PaulI presume you have increased the maximum amount of memory SQL Server can use
(Enterprise manages, right click server, properties, memory)? Does it
recognise there is now 4gb in the machine?
"Paul" <ptel4d@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:073701c351bd$5eee7320$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> If anyone has come across a similar issue, any help would
> be appreciated . We have a WIN2k3 Server (not advanced)
> running SQL 2k Enterprise. We have installed an
> additional 2gb worth of memory ramping it up to 4gb. We
> have set up AWE enabled settings on SQL 2k and adjusted
> the local security settings. Problem is that we never
> get above 2gb on our memory usage? Can someone explain
> why this is happening and maybe highlight something that
> I have missed? The reason for installing the additional
> memory was to reduce dts loads and sql qry times that hit
> 2gb memory capacity on a daily basis?!?! Why doesnt sql
> use the additional 2gb?!!
> Thanks in advance
> Paul